Causes of the collapse of the Old Russian state. Vladimir-Suzdal principality; Novgorod the Great; Galicia-Volyn principality: political system, economic development, culture
Feudal fragmentation is an obligatory historical period in the development of medieval statehood. Russia did not escape it either, and this phenomenon developed here for the same reasons and in the same ways as in other countries.
Shifted deadlines
Like everything in ancient Russian history, the period of fragmentation in our lands comes a little later than in Western Europe. If on average such a period dates back to the 10th-13th centuries, then in Russia fragmentation begins in the 11th century and actually continues until the middle of the 15th century. But this difference is not essential.
It is also not important that all the main local rulers in the era of fragmentation of Russia had some reason to be considered Rurikovich. In the west, too, all the major feudal lords were relatives.
Mistake of the Wise
By the time the Mongol conquests began (that is, already before), Russia was already completely fragmented, the prestige of the "Kyiv table" was purely formal. The decay process was not linear, there were periods of short-term centralization. There are several events that can serve as milestones in the study of this process.
Death (1054). This ruler made a not too wise decision - he officially divided his empire between his five sons. A struggle for power immediately began between them and their heirs.
The Lyubech congress (1097) (read about it) was called upon to put an end to civil strife. But instead, he officially consolidated the claims of one or another branch of the Yaroslavichs to certain territories: "... let each one keep his fatherland."
Separatist actions of the Galician and Vladimir-Suzdal princes (second half of the 12th century). They not only defiantly made efforts to prevent the strengthening of the Kyiv principality through an alliance with other rulers, but also inflicted direct military defeats on it (for example, Andrei Bogolyubsky in 1169 or Roman Mstislavovich of Galicia-Volynsky in 1202).
Temporary centralization of power was observed during the reign (1112-1125), but it was precisely that temporary, due to the personal qualities of this ruler.
The inevitability of decay
One can regret the collapse of the ancient Russian state, which led to the defeat of the Mongols, long dependence on them, and economic backwardness. But medieval empires were initially doomed to collapse.
It was almost impossible to manage a large territory from one center with the almost complete absence of passable roads. In Russia, the situation was aggravated by the winter cold and prolonged mudslides, when it was generally impossible to travel (it’s worth considering: this is not the 19th century with pit stations and shift drivers, what is it like to carry with you a supply of provisions and fodder for a journey of several weeks?). Accordingly, the state in Russia was initially centralized only conditionally, the governors and relatives of the prince sent full power locally. Naturally, they quickly had a question, why should they, at least formally, obey someone.
Trade was poorly developed, subsistence farming prevailed. Therefore, economic life did not cement the unity of the country. Culture, in the conditions of limited mobility of the majority of the population (well, where and for how long could a peasant go?) could not be such a force, although it retained ethnic unity as a result, which then facilitated a new unification.
The first division of the lands took place under Vladimir Svyatoslavich, during his reign princely feuds begin to flare up, the peak of which falls on 1015-1024, when only three of Vladimir's twelve sons survived. V. O. Klyuchevsky determined the beginning of the “specific period”, that is, the period of independence of the Russian principalities, from 1054, when, according to the will of Yaroslav the Wise, Russia was divided among his children. The beginning of the period of fragmentation (both political and feudal) should be considered 1132, when the princes ceased to reckon with the Grand Duke of Kyiv as the head of Russia.
Political fragmentation is a new form of organization of Russian statehood.
Causes of feudal fragmentation
1) The economic basis and the main cause of feudal fragmentation is often considered subsistence farming, the result of which was the absence of economic ties.
2) Improvement of farming techniques and tools, which contributed to the development of the economy of individual principalities and cities.
3) The growth and strengthening of cities as new political, economic and cultural centers. The local boyars and the prince relied on the cities in the struggle against the great Kievan prince. The growing role of the boyars and local princes led to the revival of city veche assemblies. Often the veche was used as an instrument of pressure not only on the great, but also on the local prince, forcing him to act in the interests of the local nobility. Thus, cities, as local political and economic centers, gravitating towards their lands, were the stronghold of the decentralization aspirations of local princes and nobility.
4) The need for strong local princely power to suppress the social movements that inevitably arose as feudalism developed. Therefore, the local boyars were forced to invite the prince with his retinue to their lands, the prince received a permanent reign, his own land fiefdom, and a stable rent-tax. At the same time, the prince sought to concentrate all power in his hands, limiting the rights and privileges of the boyars. This inevitably led to a struggle between the prince and the boyars.
5) The growth of boyar estates and the number of dependent smerds in them. In the XII - early XIII centuries. many boyars had feudal immunity (the right not to interfere in the affairs of the patrimony). The contradictions between the local boyars and the great prince of Kyiv led to the strengthening of the desire of the former for political independence.
6) The weakening of the external danger from the side of the Polovtsy, defeated by Vladimir Monomakh. This made it possible to direct the main resources to solving the economic problems of individual principalities and also contributed to the development of centrifugal forces in the country.
7) The weakening of the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", the movement of trade routes from Europe to the East. All this led to the loss of Kyiv's historical role, the decline of the power of the great Kievan prince, whose land estates in the XII century were significantly reduced.
8) The absence of a single rule of princely succession to the throne. The following methods are distinguished: hereditary succession (by will and ladder law); usurpation, or forceful seizure of power; transfer of power to the most influential person and election.
Fragmentation is a natural stage in the development of Ancient Russia. Each dynasty no longer considered its principality as an object of military booty, economic calculation came out on top. This allowed the local authorities to more effectively respond to the discontent of the peasants, external intrusion. Political fragmentation did not mean a rupture of ties between the Russian lands, did not lead to their complete disunity. The existence of a single religion and church organization, a single language, and the single laws of Russkaya Pravda served as a rallying point for all East Slavic lands.
Formation of new state centers
The principalities and lands of Russia of the specific period were fully established states, comparable in territory to European ones. The most important at the turn of the XII-XIII centuries. acquire the Vladimir-Suzdal and Galicia-Volyn principalities, as well as the Novgorod land, which became the political centers of North-Eastern, South-Western and North-Western Russia, respectively. In each of them, a peculiar political system is formed: a princely monarchy in the Vladimir-Suzdal land, a princely-boyar monarchy in Galicia-Volyn and a boyar (aristocratic) republic in Novgorod.
Vladimiro (Rostovo) - Suzdal land
The main factors influenced the formation of a rich and powerful principality: remoteness from the steppe nomads in the south; landscape obstacles for easy penetration of the Varangians from the north; possession of the upper reaches of the water arteries (Volga, Oka), through which wealthy Novgorod merchant caravans passed; good opportunities for economic development; significant emigration from the south (population influx); developed since the 11th century. a network of cities (Rostov, Suzdal, Murom, Ryazan, Yaroslavl, etc.); very energetic and ambitious princes who headed the principality.
The lands were regarded as the property of the prince, and the population, including the boyars, as his servants. Vassal-druzhina relations, characteristic of the period of Kievan Rus, were replaced by princely-subject relations. As a result, a patrimonial system of power developed in North-Eastern Russia.
The names of Vladimir Monomakh and his son are connected with the formation and development of the Vladimir-Suzdal Principality Yuri Dolgoruky(1125-1157), who was distinguished by his desire to expand his territory and subjugate Kyiv. He captured Kyiv and became the Grand Duke of Kyiv, actively influenced the policy of Novgorod the Great. In 1125 he moved the capital from Rostov to Suzdal, led the extensive construction of fortified cities on the borders of his principality, fought for the throne of Kyiv and occupied it from 1149 to 1151 and from 1155 to 1157; he is considered the founder of Moscow (1147).
Yuri's son and successor - Andrey Bogolyubsky(1157-1174) developed the idea of God's chosen principality of Vladimir-Suzdal, strove for ecclesiastical independence from Kyiv, fought for the subordination of Novgorod, fought with the Volga Bulgars. In Vladimir-on-Klyazma, impregnable white-stone gates were built, the Assumption Cathedral was erected. The policy of Andrei Bogolyubsky, his desire to rule alone came into conflict with the veche and boyar traditions, and in 1174 Andrei was killed as a result of a conspiracy of the boyars.
The policy of unification of all Russian lands under the rule of one prince was continued by Andrei's half-brother - Vsevolod Big Nest(1176-1212), so called for his large family. Under him, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality reached its peak. He subjugated Kyiv, Chernigov, Ryazan, Novgorod; successfully fought with the Volga Bulgaria and the Polovtsians; under him, the title of Grand Duke of Vladimir was established. By this time, the nobility was increasingly becoming the backbone of princely power. The economic rise of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality continued for some time under the sons of Vsevolod. However, at the beginning of the XIII century. there is its disintegration into destinies: Vladimir, Yaroslavl, Uglich, Pereyaslav, Yuryevsky, Murom. Principalities of North-Eastern Russia in the XIV-XV centuries. became the basis for the formation of the Moscow state.
Galicia-Volyn principality
Features and development conditions: fertile lands for agriculture and vast forests for fishing activities; significant deposits of rock salt, which was exported to neighboring countries; convenient geographical position (neighborhood with Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic), which allowed for active foreign trade; relative safety from nomad attacks; the presence of an influential local boyars, who fought for power not only among themselves, but also with the princes.
The Galician principality was significantly strengthened during the reign Yaroslav Osmomysl(1153-1187). His successor (Volyn prince Roman Mstislavovich) in 1199 managed to unite the Volyn and Galician principalities. After the death of Roman Mstislavovich in 1205, an internecine war broke out in the principality with the participation of Hungarians and Poles. Roman's son Daniel Galitsky(1221-1264), broke the boyar resistance and in 1240, having occupied Kyiv, managed to unite the southwestern and Kyiv lands. However, in the same year, the Galicia-Volyn principality was ravaged by the Mongols-Tatars, and 100 years later these lands became part of Lithuania (Volyn) and Poland (Galych).
Novgorod land
At the end of the XI - beginning of the XII century. a kind of political formation took shape here - a feudal aristocratic (boyar) republic. Novgorodians themselves called their state "Lord Veliky Novgorod".
Development Features Novgorod land: the leading branches of the economy are trade and craft; poor development of agriculture due to the low fertility of the land and harsh climatic conditions; wide development of crafts (salting, fishing, hunting, iron production, beekeeping); an exceptionally favorable geographical position (at the crossroads of trade routes linking Western Europe with Russia, and through it with the East and Byzantium); was not subjected to strong Mongol-Tatar plunder, although it paid tribute.
The Novgorod Republic was close to the European type of development (similar to the city-republics of the Hanseatic League) and the city-republics of Italy (Venice, Genoa, Florence). As a rule, Novgorod was ruled by that of the princes who held the throne of Kyiv. This allowed the eldest among the Rurik princes to control the Great Way and dominate Russia. Using the dissatisfaction of the Novgorodians (the uprising of 1136), the boyars, which possessed significant economic power, managed to finally defeat the prince in the struggle for power, Novgorod became a boyar republic. In fact, the power belonged to the boyars, the higher clergy and eminent merchants. All the highest executive bodies - posadniks (heads of government), thousand (heads of the city militia and judges in commercial affairs), bishop (head of the church, manager of the treasury, controlled the foreign policy of Veliky Novgorod), etc. - were replenished from the boyar nobility. Senior officials were elected. In the second half of the XII century. Novgorodians began to choose their spiritual pastor - Vladyka (Archbishop of Novgorod).
The prince did not have full state power, did not inherit Novgorod land, but was invited only to perform representative and military functions. Any attempt by a prince to intervene in internal affairs inevitably ended in his expulsion (58 princes visited in over 200 years).
The supreme body of power was the people's assembly - veche, which had broad powers: consideration of the most important issues of domestic and foreign policy; the invitation of the prince and the conclusion of an agreement with him; the election of an important trade policy for Novgorod, as well as a mayor, a judge for commercial affairs, etc. The actual owners of the veche were 300 "golden belts" - the largest boyars of Novgorod - by the 15th century. they actually usurped the rights of the people's council.
Kiev principality
The Kiev principality, endangered by the nomads, lost its former importance due to the outflow of the population and the decline in the importance of the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks." On the eve of the Mongol invasion, the power of the Galician-Volyn prince Daniel Romanovich was established in it. In 1299, the Russian metropolitan moved his residence to Vladimir-on-Klyazma, thus establishing a new alignment of forces in Russia.
Consequences of political fragmentation
Positive: the flourishing of cities in specific lands, the formation of new trade routes, the development of the economy and culture of individual principalities and lands.
Negative: fragmentation of principalities between heirs; constant princely strife, which exhausted the strength of the Russian lands; weakening the country's defense capability in the face of external danger. By 1132, there were about 15 isolated territories, at the beginning of the 13th century. There were already 50 independent principalities and destinies, and at the end of the 13th century. - 250.
The process of the onset of feudal fragmentation made it possible for the developing system of feudal relations to be firmly established in Russia. From this position, we can talk about the historical progressiveness of this stage of Russian history in the framework of the development of the economy and culture. In addition, this period was an important prerequisite for the formation of a single and integral state.
The historical path from formation to the collapse of the Old Russian stateEastern Slavs have passed for three centuries. The unification of disparate Slavic tribes by Prince Rurik in 862 gave a powerful impetus to the development of the country, which reached its peak by the middle XI century. But already a hundred years later, instead of a powerful state, dozens of independent, medium-sized principalities were formed. Period XII - XVI centuries gave rise to the definition of "Specific Russia".
The beginning of the collapse of a single state
The heyday of the Russian state fell on the period of power of the Grand Duke Yaroslav the Wise. He, like his predecessors of the Rurik family, did a lot to strengthen external ties, increase borders and state power.
Kievan Rus was actively engaged in trade, developed handicraft and agricultural production. The historian N. M. Karamzin wrote: "Ancient Russia buried its power and prosperity with Yaroslav." Yaroslav the Wise died in 1054, this date is considered the beginningcollapse of the Old Russian state.
Lubech Congress of Princes. Trying to stop decay
From that moment, strife for power broke out between the heirs of the princely throne. Three of his sons entered into a dispute, but the younger Yaroslavichi, the grandsons of the prince, did not lag behind them. This happened at a time when the Polovtsy first raided Russia from the steppes. The princes, who were at war with each other, sought to achieve power and wealth at any cost. Some of them, hoping to get rich destinies, entered into an agreement with enemies and brought their hordes to Russia.
The disastrous strife for the country was seen by some princes, one of whom was the grandson of Yaroslav Vladimir Monomakh. In 1097, he convinced the princes-relatives to meet in the city of Lyubech, on the Dnieper, and agree on the rule of the country. They managed to divide the land among themselves. Kissing the cross in fidelity to the agreement, they decided: "Let the Russian land be a common fatherland, and whoever rises up against his brother, we will all rise up against him." But the agreement did not last long: one of the brothers blinded the other, and anger and distrust flared up in the family with renewed vigor. The congress of princes in Lyubech actually opened a wide road to the collapse of the Old Russian stategiving it the legal force of the agreement.
Further fragmentation of the state
Nothing else held back the decayOld Russian state, for centuriesreceding into an era of political disunity. Scientists call it the period of specific, or feudal, fragmentation.
Fragmentation, according to historians, was a natural stage in the development of the Russian state. In Europe, not a single country could avoid this during the period of early feudalism. The power of the prince at that time was weak, the functions of the state were insignificant, and the desire of the wealthy landowners to strengthen their specific power, to get out of obedience to centralized rule was understandable.
Events accompanying the collapse of the Old Russian state
Russian scattered lands, little connected with each other, led a subsistence economy, sufficient for their own consumption, but not capable of ensuring the unity of the state. The decline in the world influence of the Byzantine Empire coincided in time, which was weakening and soon ceased to be a major center. Thus, the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, which allowed Kyiv to carry out international relations for many centuries, also lost its significance.
Kievan Rus united several dozen tribes with complex relationships within the clan. In addition, nomadic raids also made life difficult for them. Fleeing, people left their inhabited places for sparsely populated lands, arranged their dwelling there. This is how the far north-eastern part of Russia was settled, which led to an increase in the territory of the state and the loss of influence of the Kyiv prince on them.
The emergence of private feudal landownership also contributed to the generation of feudal fragmentation and the disintegration of the Old Russian state intoindependent lands. The warriors, who often received payment from the prince for their service in the form of land allotments or simply took them away from the weaker, began to settle down on the land. Large feudal estates appear - boyar villages, the power and influence of their owners are growing. The presence of a large number of such possessions becomes incompatible with the state, which has a large territory and a weak administrative apparatus.
The reasons for the collapse of the Old Russian state briefly
Historians call the fragmentation of Russia into small specific principalities a process that was natural in those conditions.
The presence of disunity between the Slavic tribes and the superiority of a subsistence economy sufficient for the community to live.
The emergence of new, rich and influential feudal lords, an increase in the princely-boyar land ownership, who did not want to share power and income with Kyiv.
The intensifying struggle between numerous heirs for power and land.
Migration of tribal communities to new distant lands due to the robberies of nomads, removal from Kyiv, loss of contact with it.
The loss of world domination by Byzantium, the decrease in trade turnover of the trade route to it, the weakening of Kyiv's international relations.
The emergence of new cities as centers of specific principalities, the growth of their importance against the background of the weakening of the power of Kyiv.
The consequences of the collapse of Russia
Consequences of the collapse of the Old Russian stateare both positive and negative. Positive consequences include:
the emergence and flourishing of cities in numerous principalities;
search for trade routes to replace the Byzantine one, which has lost its former importance;
preservation of a single spirituality, religion, as well as cultural traditions by the Russian people.
The negative consequences of this event are:
incessant princely wars among themselves;
division of land into small plots in favor of all heirs;
reduced ability to defend, lack of unity in the country.
Significant negative consequences had a most serious impact on the life of the Old Russian state during the period of collapse
. But scientists do not consider it a retreat back in the development of Russia.Some specific centers
During this historical period, the power of Kyiv and its importance as the first city of the state, gradually decreasing, comes to naught. Now it is just one of the major Russian cities. At the same time, the importance of other lands and their centers is growing.
The Novgorod land was the first to come out from under the authority of the Grand Duke. The structure of management of the inheritance that has developed there is called by historians a feudal republic. The locals themselves called their state "Lord Veliky Novgorod". The supreme power here was represented by the people's assembly - the veche, which removed objectionable princes, inviting others to rule.
Mongol invasion
Nomadic Mongolian tribes united at the beginning of XIIcentury Genghis Khan, invaded the territory of Russia.The collapse of the Old Russian stateweakened him, making him a desirable prey for the invaders.
For many centuries, Mongol-Tatar dominion was established in Russia.
Any large state in its history goes through stages of formation, expansion, weakening and disintegration. The collapse of the state is almost always painful and is considered by descendants as a tragic page in history. Kievan Rus was no exception. Its collapse was accompanied by internecine wars and a struggle with an external enemy. It began in the 11th century and ended by the end of the 13th century.
Feudal way of Russia | According to the established tradition, each prince did not bequeath his possessions to one son, but distributed the possessions among all his sons. A similar phenomenon led to the fragmentation of not only Russia, but also dozens of other feudal monarchies of Eurasia. |
The transformation of inheritances into estates. Formation of dynasties | Often, after the death of an appanage prince, his son became the next prince, although formally the Grand Duke of Kyiv could appoint any of his relatives to the appanage. Not feeling dependent on Kyiv, the specific princes pursued an increasingly independent policy. |
Economic independence | Due to the predominance of subsistence farming, the destinies, especially on the outskirts of Russia, had little need for the development of a nationwide transport and trade infrastructure. |
Weakening of the capital | The struggle of the specific princes for the right to possess Kyiv harmed the city itself and weakened its power. Over time, the possession of the ancient capital of Russia ceased to be a priority for the princes. |
Global changes in the world | By the end of the 12th century, against the backdrop of the weakening of Byzantium and the activation of nomads in the Great Steppe and Asia Minor, the “Road from the Varangians to the Greeks” lost its former significance. At one time, he played an important role in the unification of the Kyiv and Novgorod lands. The decline of the Way led to a weakening of ties between the ancient centers of Russia. |
Mongolian factor | After the Mongol-Tatar invasion, the title of Grand Duke lost its former meaning, since the appointment of each specific prince depended not on the Grand Duke's will, but on the Horde yarlyk. |
The consequences of the collapse of Russia
Formation of individual East Slavic peoples | Although in the era of the unity of Russia there were differences in the traditions, social structure and speech of various East Slavic tribes, during the years of feudal fragmentation, these differences became much brighter. |
Strengthening regional centers | Against the background of the weakening of Kyiv, some specific principalities strengthened. Some of them (Polotsk, Novgorod) were important centers before, while others (Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Turov, Vladimir-Volynsky) began to play an important role at the turn of the 12th-13th centuries. |
Decline of cities | Unlike rural subsistence farms, cities needed supplies of many goods. The appearance of new borders and the loss of uniform laws led to the decline of urban crafts and trade. |
Political decline | Fragmented Russia could not resist the Mongol invasion. The expansion of Russian lands stopped, and some of them came under the control of neighboring states (Poland, knightly states, the Horde). |
Formation and rise of new states. | In the northeastern and northwestern parts of Russia, new centers arose, which again began to gather around themselves the East Slavic lands. In Novogrudok, the Lithuanian principality was born, the capital of which was later transferred to Vilna. In the northeastern part of Russia, the Moscow principality was formed. It was these two entities that began the successful process of uniting the East Slavic lands. The Lithuanian principality eventually turned into a unitary class-representative monarchy, and the Moscow one into an absolute one. |
The collapse of Russia and world history
Representatives of academic science unanimously agree that the stage of feudal fragmentation is a natural and inevitable part of the history of any feudal state. The collapse of Russia was accompanied by the complete loss of a single all-Russian center and powerful foreign policy upheavals. Many believe that it was during this period that the three East Slavic peoples clearly stood out from the previously single Old Russian people. Although centralized states began to form on the territory of Russia already in the 14th century, the last specific principalities were liquidated only at the end of the 15th century.
Editor L.I. Rubanova
National history
Materials for lectures
for full-time and part-time students
Irkutsk 2005
Dyatlova N.I. Domestic history: materials for lectures. - Irkutsk: IrGUPS, 2005-
The materials were prepared by the author for first and second year students of all specialties of full-time and distance learning studying the discipline "National History" as additional material that they can use in self-preparation for lectures, seminars and exams.
Reviewers: Dr. ist. sciences, prof. V.G. Tretyakov (IRGUPS)
Candidate of History, Assoc. T.A.Stepanova (ISU)
© Dyatlova N.I., 2005
Signed for printing Format 60 x 84 / 16
Offset paper. Offset printing. Print Service
Uch.-ed.l. Circulation Zak.
ID No. 06506 dated 12/26/2001
Irkutsk State Technical University
664074, Irkutsk, st. Lermontova, 83
Questions:
1. The origin of the Slavic ethnic group.
2. Formation of the Old Russian state - Kievan Rus.
3. Socio - political system of Kievan Rus.
4. The collapse of Kievan Rus.
Ethnos- a type of stable social grouping of people that has historically emerged, represented by a tribe, nationality, nation. The Slavic ethnos included several peoples. The ancestors of the Slavs - the Proto-Slavs lived to the east of the Germans, occupied territories from the Elbe and Oder to the Donets, Oka and Upper Volga, from the Baltic Pomerania to the Middle and Lower reaches of the Danube and the Black Sea.
The lecture will discuss in detail the issue of migration and autochthonous theories of the origin of the Slavic ethnos. In the VI century, the Eastern Slavs stand out from a single Slavic community. The group of Eastern Slavs included tribal unions: glades, drevlyans, krivichi, etc.
Until the 6th century, Russia was not yet a state, but a union of tribes. The Slavs lived in tribal communities, then there was a transition to a territorial (neighboring) community. Gradually, communities develop into cities, to IX century is formed state - Kievan Rus, which lasted until the early 30s of the XII century. There are different points of view on the question of the origin of the state among the Slavs. The authors Norman theory I. Bayer, G. Miller, A. Schlozer, formulated in the 18th century, argued that the state among the Slavs was created by the Scandinavian peoples-Normans or Varangians. (The Russians until the 18th century called the Baltic Sea Varangian).
Modern historians no longer adhere to such extreme views and recognize that the Varangians were indeed the first all-Russian princes, but the state in Russia began to take shape before the calling of the Varangians.
It is necessary to highlight background of education the ancient Russian state: economic - the transition to arable farming, the separation of craft from agriculture, the concentration of craft in cities, the development of trade; political - the formation of Slavic tribal unions, the need for the tribal nobility in an apparatus to protect their privileges, a sufficient level of military organization, the threat of attack from outside; social - the change of the tribal community of the neighbor, the emergence of inequality, the similarity of customs, rituals, psychology, beliefs of the Slavic tribes.
The territory of the state included lands from the Baltic to the Black Sea and lands from the Carpathians to the Volga and Oka.
It is possible to single out the main stages in the history of Kievan Rus: IX - the end of the X centuries. (from Oleg to Svyatoslav) the formation of the state; end of the 10th – first half of the 11th centuries heyday (Vladimir the Holy, Yaroslav the Wise); second half of the 11th - early 12th centuries sunset (Mstislav).
The lecture will examine in detail the issues of the political and social structure of Kievan Rus.
Political system Kievan Rus was characterized by most historians as an early feudal monarchy. At the head of the state was the great prince of Kyiv. Rurik (862-879) became the founder of the dynasty of Kievan princes. The princes had a squad. The prince ruled with the help of the advice of other princes and senior warriors (boyars). This council was called the Boyar Duma. Junior combatants (lads, gridi, children) performed the duties of officials.
The princes of individual lands and other feudal lords were in vassal dependence on the Grand Duke. They were obliged to supply soldiers to the Grand Duke, to appear at his request with a squad. Unlike Europe, the boyars and princes in Russia lived in cities, and not in separate castles.
Modern historians believe that Russia cannot be called either a monarchy or a republic in the modern sense of these concepts. The power of the prince was really great. The princes were the richest people in Russia, they had huge fortunes. The princes were respected by the population; when meeting with them, it was customary to bow to the ground. The princes possessed sufficient military force, subordinate only to them, which in some cases made it possible to use direct violence against citizens.
However, it is impossible to call the Grand Duke of Kyiv a real monarch. His power was limited to other representatives of the princely family. The Kyiv prince, in relation to other representatives of the princely family, was not a monarch, but the eldest in the family. The power of the prince was limited to the townspeople. The townspeople, gathering at the veche, sometimes quite decisively and sharply intervened in inter-princely disputes and relations. Unwanted princes were expelled by the townspeople, the necessary ones, which they liked, were invited to reign. Gradually, the princes concentrated in their hands the legislative, administrative, judicial and military power.
By the XIII century, a set of laws "Russian Truth" took shape.
The social structure of society. To upper strata The population includedprinces, boyars. To inferior- related to the free population, paying taxes to the state - people, smerds. This category also included personally dependent groups of the population - serfs (servants), purchases, ryadovichi, etc.
An important role in the creation of the state - Kievan Rus played Christianity. The lecture will highlight the reasons and conditions for the adoption of Christianity. Before the adoption of Christianity, the Slavs were pagans. Each tribe had its own gods, patrons. In Russia, new social relations were formed, social stratification took place. All this required a new ideology. Paganism, with its equality of people before the forces of nature, could not explain and justify the origin and growth of inequality. The religious reform of the great Kyiv prince Vladimir took place in 2 stages. At the first stage, an attempt was made to unite on the basis of one pagan god - Perun. At the second stage in 988 Christianity was introduced in the Orthodox version. This religion most corresponded to the needs of the state.
With the adoption of Christianity, the Julian calendar is introduced with the Roman names of the months, the seven-day week and the Byzantine designation of the era: from the creation of the world. Prior to this, the calculation of time in Russia was carried out according to the lunar-solar calendar, which was reflected in the names of the months, and the year began on March 1.
The adoption of Christianity was of great importance for Russia: the state power and territorial unity of the Old Russian state were strengthened; Kievan Rus became equal to European Christian countries; the new religion had a positive impact on the economy - foreign trade is growing, agricultural production is developing; the new religion changed the way of life and customs of people; culture developed further. It is necessary to highlight the negative aspects in the adoption of Christianity - a cult of power was formed, the church became the ideological instrument of the state.
The last great prince of Kyiv was Mstislav (1125-1132).
In the XII century, after the death of Prince Mstislav, Kievan Rus broke up into separate lands and principalities. The lecture will cover factors of feudal fragmentation: economic - the development of a subsistence economy, the economic independence of estates, the isolation of estates and communities, the growth and strengthening of cities; political - tribal and territorial conflicts, strengthening the political power of local princes and boyars; foreign economic - elimination for a while of the danger of an attack from outside.
For almost the entire 12th century, Russian princes fought for the throne of Kyiv. In just 30 years since 1146, 28 people have changed on it. This was due to the fact that all Russian princes were relatives, at the end of the 12th century there were about 50 of them. All of them came from St. Vladimir. In Europe there was no state where all the feudal nobility belonged to one family. This was due to a different principle than in Kievan Rus, the principle of inheritance. In Kievan Rus, the "ladder" principle of succession to the throne of the prince dominated, which included two contradictory principles: the Kievan throne was passed from brother to brother, and the oldest brother had the right to occupy it. But, on the other hand, even the eldest in the family could claim it. This contradiction has repeatedly led to conflict situations.
Period of feudal fragmentation covers in general XII - XV centuries. During this period, 3 main political centers were determined: the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, the Galicia-Volyn principality and the Novgorod feudal republic. These lands in their development had their own distinctive features, which will be clarified in detail at the seminar.
During this period, representatives of the Rurik clan ruled the lands and principalities. A single religion and a single church organization were preserved.
Modern historical science believes that feudal fragmentation in Russia was a natural result of the development of early feudal society
Historians consider the fragmentation of Russia into independent principalities from two sides. On the one hand, this became a tragedy, weakened Russia in front of its enemies. But at the same time, during the period of feudal fragmentation, the economic and cultural upsurge of the Russian lands takes place.
In the 30-40s of the XIII century, Russian lands were invaded by the Mongol-Tatars. The first clash between Russian and Mongolian soldiers took place in 1223 on the river. Kalka. In 1237 -1238. The Mongol army led by Batu began the seizure of Russian scattered lands.
C 1243-1246 the Mongol-Tatar yoke (an oppressive, enslaving force) was established on the Russian lands. The term "Tatar yoke" was introduced into circulation by Russian historians in the 18th and early 19th centuries. This term traditionally refers to the system of exploitation of Russian lands by Mongol-Tatar feudal lords. There was no stable system of “yoke” relations. The attitude of the Horde towards the Russian principalities was constantly changing. In the initial period, the collection of tribute from the Russian lands was carried out by Mongolian Baskak officials. Later, the Russian princes themselves began to carry out this activity.
The Mongol yoke was undermined as a result of the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380 and finally liquidated in 1480 after a confrontation on the Ugra River.
It is necessary to pay attention to the negative political, economic and social consequences of the Mongol invasion.